Our definition of evolving federalism means that we advocate for a gradual transition from the current unitary-devolved structure to a fully federal Philippines over a long period of time. We look to employ the use of asymmetric federalism, described below, before becoming completely federal.
"Asymmetric federalism covers many meanings. At one level, asymmetry refers to cultural, socioeconomic, and political party differences between the federated entities (e.g. regions, cantons, provinces, states, and communities) of a federation and the center. We call this de facto asymmetry.1 At a different level, asymmetry is used to describe a situation whereby some federated entities have gained greater self-governing powers than others.2 We call this de jure asymmetry. De facto asymmetry frequently leads to the entrenchment of some formal asymmetric institutional devices. The federal systems of Spain, Russia, India, and Belgium contain elements of de jure asymmetry.3"
…
"1Some authors employ the term (in)congruent instead of (a)symmetric federalism. See, Arend Lijphart, Patterns of Democracy (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999), pp. 195-197 and Charles D. Tarlton, “Symmetry and Asymmetry as Elements of Federalism: A Theoretical Speculation,” Journal of Politics 27 (Winter 1965): 861-874
2Will Kymlicka, Politics in the Vernacular: Nationalism, Multiculturalism and Citizenship (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), p. 104.
3The term “asymmetry” can be applied to all federal political systems, not necessarily to federations only. Daniel J. Elazar pointed at the presence of associated states, federations, and condominiums as examples of asymmetrical federal arrangements. See, Daniel J. Elazar, Exploring Federalism (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1987), pp. 44-61."
References: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3330967